https://conversableeconomist.blogspot.com/2012/05/inequality-of-leisure.html
I think the current labor policy of allowing billionaires to work educated workers for 70 hour per week on a 40/week salary but required to pay uneducated workers overtime has something to do with the leisure levels.

Just to be clear, Attanasio, Hurst, and Pistaferri are in no way making some foolish argument the rise in income and consumption inequality that benefits those at the top of the income scale shouldn't matter, because it is offset by greater inequality of leisure benefiting those who tend to be at the bottom of the income scale.
But although the U.S. economy has become much less equal with regard to income and consumption, it is worth remembering that these are not the only measures of well-being. For example, I posted on June 29, 2011, about how "Inequality of Mortality" has been greatly reduced. And as leisure has become less equally distributed in a way that tends to favor those with lower skill levels, those with a rising share of leisure are better off in that dimension of well-being, albeit in a way that isn't captured in income or consumption statistics.
I think the current labor policy of allowing billionaires to work educated workers for 70 hour per week on a 40/week salary but required to pay uneducated workers overtime has something to do with the leisure levels.